Field of the Invention
The present invention is related to nanofibers, methods and devices for electrospinning, methods and devices for depositing the nanofibers, and filters and other articles formed from the deposited nanofibers.
Description of the Related Art
The filtration industry has traditionally manufactured particulate air filters using conventional medium such as glass, cotton or polymer fibers made provided as rolled goods. The fibrous media may be made by non-woven processes such as wet laid paper, melt blown-spinning or woven yarn. The material is then transported to equipment where the media is cut, pleated, supported, glued into filter frames, and tested for leaks. Various measures of the properties of the rolled goods include appropriate weight per unit area, porosity, etc.
The porous filter media may be pleated or bonded into bags to increase the area of the media within individual filter units to reduce pressure drop. Often screens and other supports are added to prevent collapse of the media from the force of air flowing through the filter unit as dust is collected. Depending on the intended use of the filter, the filter may be tested with an appropriate challenge aerosol at a rated or standard airflow rate for pressure drop and particle collection efficiency. (e. g., ASHRAE 52.2, MIL-STD-282, IEST RP-CC 007.1, NIOSH APRS-STP-0051-00, and NIOSH APRS-0057-00 may be used to test the filters)
Theoretically, a reduction of the diameter of the fibers in a filter has the potential of causing an improvement of the filter system performance. For high efficiency filtration, fiberglass wet-laid papers are widely used having fiber diameters in the 200 nm to 5000 nm size range with the fiber sizes intentionally blended for both durability and filtration performance.
One technique for producing a smaller fiber diameter, and hence a potential for generating improved filtration media, is electrospinning of polymers to make submicron and nanofibers. Electrospinning as currently practiced uses a constant voltage to drive the spinning process defined herein as static field electrospinning.
However, electrospun nanofibers smaller than 500 nm are typically fragile, difficult to produce, and difficult to handle. One conventional approach has been to deposit nanofibers onto a conventional porous filter media to make a layered nanofiber filter media. The following patents describe conventional ways to fabricate nanofiber containing filters for various applications: U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,008,465; 6,994,742; 6,974,490; 6,955,775; 6,924,028; 6,875,256; 6,875,249; 6,800,117; 6,746,517; 6,743,273; 6,740,142; 6,716,274; and 6,673,136, and U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 10/757,924 and 10/676,185; the entire contents of each of these patents are incorporated in entirety herein by reference.
An ideal particulate filter is the one that would give the highest particle collection efficiency (lowest particle penetration) with the least pressure drop. One criterion for comparing filters of different thickness is the filter quality factor or figure of merit (FoM). The greater the value of FoM, the better the filter will perform (Hinds, 1982). One expression for this parameter is given by:FoM=−Log(Pt)/ΔP  (1)where: Pt is the fractional penetration of a specific aerosol particle diameter (efficiency=(1−Pt)), and ΔP is the pressure drop corresponding to a specific face velocity of the filter (volumetric air flow divided by filter cross sectional area). As used herein, figure of merit given by −Log (Pt)/ΔP, where Pt is the fractional penetration of a specific aerosol particle diameter and ΔP is a pressure drop across the filtration medium corresponding to a face velocity of 5.3 cm/s and particle size of 0.3 microns.
Typically, the FoM of a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) glass fiber media is 12 kPa−1 measured at a face velocity of 5.33 cm/s and 0.3 μm particle diameter. These are the standard conditions for HEPA media tests (i.e., IEST-RP-CC021.1).
The FoM of the layered nanofiber conventional porous filter media described above is limited by the relatively large fiber diameters of the coarse substrate which produce a relatively low FoM. The FoM of the layered nanofiber conventional porous filter media composite depends on the relative quantities of layers of nanofibers and conventional media and their respective FoM. In other words, while the individual layers of nanofibers may have a higher FoM than the conventional porous filter media substrate, the composite FoM is closer to the value of the convention porous filter media substrate because of the relative quantities of materials used in the conventional approach. Therefore at the current state-of-the-art, conventional layered nanofiber filter media do not provide filters with significantly greater FoM than conventional fiberglass media.
References describing various background materials and filter testing procedures include:                1. ASHRAE (1999) Method of Testing General Ventilation Air-Cleaning Devices for Removal Efficiency by Particle Size, Standard 52.2-1999. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 1791 Tullie Circle, N. E. Atlanta, USA.        2. Ahn, Y. C., S. K. Park, et al. (2005). “Development of high efficiency nanofilters made of nanofibers.” Current Applied Physics: In press (accessed online).        3. Dhaniyala, S. and B. Y. H. Liu (1999a). “Investigations of particle penetration in fibrous filters part I. Experimental.” Journal of the IEST 42(1): 32-40.        4. Dhaniyala, S. and B. Y. H. Liu (1999b). “Investigations of particle penetration in fibrous filters Part II. Theoretical.” Journal of the IEST 42(2): 40-46.        5. Hinds, W. C. (1982). Aerosol Technology. New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.        6. IEST (1992) Institute of Environmental Sciences, Testing ULPA Filters. IEST RP-CC 007.1 Institute of Environmental Science and Technology, Rolling Meadows, USA.        7. IEST (1995) Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology (1995) Testing HEPA and ULPA Filter Media, IEST-RP-CC021.1, Rolling Meadows, Ill.        8. MIL-STD-282, Filter units, Protective Clothing, Gas-mask Components and Related Products: Performance Test Methods, US Government Printing Office, May 28, 1956.        9. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Particulate Filter Penetration Procedure to Test Negative Pressure Respirators against Liquid Particulates (Procedure APRS-STP-0051-00) Morgantown, W. Va.: NIOSH Division of Safety Research, 1955.        10. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Particulate Filter Penetration Procedure to Test Negative Pressure Respirators against Solid Particulates (Procedure APRS-STP-0057-00) Morgantown, W. Va.: NIOSH Division of Safety Research, 1955.        11. Park, H. S. and Y. O. Park (2005). “Filtration properties of electrospun utrafine fiber webs.” Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering 22(1): 165-172.        12. Schreuder-Gibson, H. L., P. Gibson, et al. (2004). “Cooperative charging effects of fibers from electrospinning of electrically dissimilar polymers.” International Nonwovens Journal 13(4): 39-45.        13. Thomas, D., P. Contal, V. Renaudin, P. Penicot, D. Leclerc and J. Vendel (1999) Modelling pressure drop in HEPA filters during dynamic filtration. J. Aerosol Science, 30(2) 235-246.        14. S. Payet, D. Boulaud, G. Madelaine and A. Renoux (1992) Penetration and pressure drop of a HEPA filter during loading with submicron liquid particles. J. Aerosol Science 23(7). 723-735.        15. Bhattarai, S. R., N. Bhattarai, et al. (2004). “Novel biodegradable electrospun membrane: scaffold for tissue engineering.” Biomaterials 25(13): 2595-2602.        16. Boudriot, U., B. Goetz, et al. (2005). “Role of electrospun nanofibers in stem cell technologies and tissue engineering.” Macromolecular Symposia 225: 9-16.        17. Choi, S. S., Y. S. Lee, et al. (2004). “Electrospun PVDF nanofiber web as polymer electrolyte or separator.” Electrochimica Acta 50(2-3): 339-343.        18. Choi, S. W., S. M. Jo, et al. (2003). “An electrospun poly(vinylidene fluoride) nanofibrous membrane and its battery applications.” Advanced Materials 15(23): 2027-2032.        19. Jia, H. F., G. Y. Zhu, et al. (2002). “Enzyme-carrying polymeric nanofibers prepared via electrospinning for use as unique biocatalysts.” Biotechnology Progress 18(5): 1027-1032.        20. Liu, H. Q., J. B. Edel, et al. (2006). “Electrospun polymer nanofibers as subwavelength optical waveguides incorporating quantum dots.” Small 2(4): 495-499.        21. Zhang, Y. Z., C. T. Lim, et al. (2005). “Recent development of polymer nanofibers for biomedical and biotechnological applications.” Journal of Materials Science-Materials in Medicine 16(10): 933-946.        22. Aussawasathien, D., J. H. Dong, et al. (2005). “Electrospun polymer nanofiber sensors.” Synthetic Metals 154(1-3): 37-40.        23. Chronakis, I. S. (2005). “Novel nanocomposites and nanoceramics based on polymer nanofibers using electrospinning process—A review.” Journal of Materials Processing Technology 167(2-3): 283-293.        24. Demir, M. M., M. A. Gulgun, et al. (2004). “Palladium nanoparticles by electrospinning from poly(acrylonitrile-co-acrylic acid)-PdCl2 solutions. Relations between preparation conditions, particle size, and catalytic activity.” Macromolecules 37(5): 1787-1792.        25. Ding, B., M. Yamazaki, et al. (2005). “Electrospun fibrous polyacrylic acid membrane-based gas sensors.” Sensors and Actuators B-Chemical 106(1): 477-483.        26. Huang, Z. M., Y. Z. Zhang, et al. (2003). “A review on polymer nanofibers by electrospinning and their applications in nanocomposites.” Composites Science and Technology 63(15): 2223-2253.        27. Jia, H. F., G. Y. Zhu, et al. (2002). “Enzyme-carrying polymeric nanofibers prepared via electrospinning for use as unique biocatalysts.” Biotechnology Progress 18(5): 1027-1032.        28. Katti, D. S., K. W. Robinson, et al. (2004). “Bioresorbable nanofiber-based systems for wound healing and drug delivery: Optimization of fabrication parameters.” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B-Applied Biomaterials 70B(2): 286-296.        29. Kenawy, E. R. and Y. R. Abdel-Fattah (2002). “Antimicrobial properties of modified and electrospun poly(vinyl phenol).” Macromolecular Bioscience 2(6): 261-266.        30. Khil, M. S., D. I. Cha, et al. (2003). “Electrospun nanofibrous polyurethane membrane as wound dressing.” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B-Applied Biomaterials 67B(2): 675-679.            31. Liu, H. Q., J. Kameoka, et al. (2004). “Polymeric nanowire chemical sensor.” Nano Letters 4(4): 671-675.    32. Luong-Van, E., L. Grondahl, et al. (2006). “Controlled release of heparin from poly(epsilon-caprolactone) electrospun fibers.” Biomaterials 27(9): 2042-2050.            33. Ma, Z. W., M. Kotaki, et al. (2005). “Potential of nanofiber matrix as tissue-engineering scaffolds.” @Tissue Engineering 11(1-2): 101-109.        34. Murugan, R. and S. Ramakrishna (2006). “Nano-featured scaffolds for tissue engineering: A review of spinning methodologies.” Tissue Engineering 12(3): 435-447.        35. Spasova, M., N. Manolova, et al. (2004). “Preparation of chitosan-containing nanofibres by electrospinning of chitosan/poly(ethylene oxide) blend solutions.” E-Polymers.        36. Zeng, J., X. Y. Xu, et al. (2003). “Biodegradable electrospun fibers for drug delivery.” Journal of Controlled Release 92(3): 227-231.The entire contents of these references are incorporate herein by reference.        
More recently, as described in U.S. application Ser. No. 11/559,282, noted above, a filtration device was provided which included a filtration medium having a plurality of nanofibers of diameters less than 1 micron which were formed into a fiber mat in the presence of an abruptly varying electric field. The filtration device in the '282 application included a support attached to the filtration medium which had openings for fluid flow there through.